alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                    SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF THE CEO/CFO

                             EMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                       AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

      Each of the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of EMS Technologies, Inc. hereby individually certifies that the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2005, to
which this Certification is attached, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the
information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of EMS Technologies, Inc.

In witness whereof, each of the undersigned has executed and delivered this
Certification on this 31st day of March, 2006.

/s/ Alfred G. Hansen                       /s/ Don T. Scartz
------------------------------             -----------------------------
Alfred G. Hansen                           Don T. Scartz
Chief Executive Officer                    Chief Financial Officer
EMS Technologies, Inc.                     EMS Technologies, Inc.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the interim
financial statements for the six month period ended June 30, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,108
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      722
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (69)
<INVENTORY>                                        144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,059
<PP&E>                                           3,059
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,037)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,809
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,054
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,809
<SALES>                                          9,558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,558
<CGS>                                            7,306
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,554
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  77
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    668
<INCOME-TAX>                                       272
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                396
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       396
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .038
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .038


</TABLE>
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 5 A1 45 6 . J ERRY L. HOW ARD v

. THE STATE.

J erry L. Ho ward was fo u n d g u i lt y o f rap e an d o t her cri m es , aft er wh i ch h e fi l ed

a ti m el y m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

. On Sep tem b er 1 6
, 2 0 1 4, th e t ri al co u rt en tered an o rd er d en y i n g h i s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

. On Oct o b er 1 7
, 2 0 1 4
, Ho ward fi l ed a p ro s e n o t i ce

o f ap p eal

. 1 To b e t i m el y , a n ot ice o f ap p eal m us t b e fi led w i t hi n 3 0 d ay s aft er en t ry

o f t h e ap p eal ab l e o rd er. See OCGA § 5 -6 -3 8 (a). Th e p ro p er an d t i m el y fi l i n g o f a

n o t i ce o f ap p eal is an ab s o l u t e req u i rem en t t o co nfer ju ri s d i ct i o n o n t h is Co u rt

. Ja h en i v. S t a t e , 2 81 Ga. Ap p. 2 1 3
, 2 1 4 ( 6 3 5 S E 2 d 8 2 1) (2 0 0 6). Becau se Ho ward
fi led hi s n o t i ce o f ap p eal 31 d ay s aft er en try o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er, t h is ap p eal i s

u n t i m el y . Acco rd i n g ly , t h i s ap peal i s h ereb y DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f ju ri s di ct i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

.

1 Th e co u rt p erm i t t ed Ho ward ’s a t t o rn ey t o w i t hd raw b ecau s e he wi s h ed to rep res en t h i m s el f o n ap p eal

. 04/21/2015 April 21, 2015
# C_2014315EN.01005201.xml

| 15.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/52

---

Order of the General Court of 7 July 2014 — Cofresco Frischhalteprodukte v Commission

(Case T-223/13) (1)

1

((Application for annulment - Environment - Directive 94/62/EC - Packaging and packaging waste - Directive 2013/2/EU - Rolls, tubes and cylinders around which flexible material is wound - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissibility))

2014/C 315/87

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Cofresco Frischhalteprodukte GmbH & Co. KG (Minden, Germany) (represented by: H. Weil, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Alcover San Pedro and J.-F. Brakeland, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for partial annulment of Commission Directive 2013/2/EU of 7 February 2013 amending Annex I to Directive 94/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on packaging and packaging waste (OJ 2013 L 37, p. 10), in so far as the Commission adds rolls, tubes and cylinders around which flexible material is wound, with the exception of those intended as parts of production machinery and not used to present a product as a sales unit, to the list of examples of products illustrating the application of criteria that define the concept of ‘packaging’.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Cofresco Frischhalteprodukte GmbH & Co. KG is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Cofresco Frischhalteprodukte GmbH & Co. KG is ordered to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18427]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB 
Approval

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is 
announcing that a collection of information has been approved by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995. This document announces the OMB approval number and expiration 
date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert O'Brien, Division of Administration and Training Information, 
Office of Training and Education, Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 1555 Times Drive, Des 
Plaines, IL 60018, telephone (847) 297-4810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of January 21, 1998, 
(63 FR 3155-3156), the Agency announced its intent to request 
reinstatement of its OMB approval for the Student Data Form. In 
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520), OMB has reinstated its approval for this information collection 
and assigned OMB control number 1218-0172 to the Student Data Form. The 
approval expires 5/31/2001. Under 5 CFR 1320.5(b), an Agency may not 
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless the collection displays a valid 
control number.

    Dated: July 2, 1998.
Charles N. Jeffress,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18427 Filed 7-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-M
Exhibit 31.1 Certification of Chief
Executive Officer                              Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and
15d-14                    As Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 Robert M. Callahan, Chief Executive
Officer of Metwood, Inc., certifies that: 1.
I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Metwood, Inc.;  2.
Based
on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period  covered by this annual report;  3.
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in
this annual report fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of and for the periods
presented in this annual report;  4.
The
registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14
and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:  a)
designed
such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiary, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
being prepared;  b)
evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date
within ninety days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the Evaluation
Date); and  c)
presented
in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;   32     5.
The
registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)
all
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses
in internal controls; and  b)
any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal controls; and  6.
The
registrants other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual report whether
there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.  Date: September 8, 2004

/s/ Robert M. Callahan
Robert M. CallahanChief Executive Officer  33
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 19

- 00261

- CR

T HOMAS A RDARLYN C HANDLER AKA

T HOMAS A RDALYN C HANDLER

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 213t h District

Court

of Tarrant County (1477977D)

April 23, 2020

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment s . It is ordered that th e judgment s of the

trial court are affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

Justice Wade Birdwell
# HQC Active Shooter training teaches ‘Run, Hide, Fight’

/ Published Sept. 18, 2015
Fort Belvoir, Virginia,
No. 10-6168.

#### Darryl Scott Stinski, Petitioner v. Georgia.

562 U.S. 1011, 131 S. Ct. 522,

178 L. Ed. 2d 385,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8606,

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia denied.

Same case below, 286 Ga. 839, 691 S.E.2d 854.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17038]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-251-000]


Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

June 22, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 17, 1998, Colorado Interstate Gas Company 
(CIG), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to the 
filing, to be effective August 1, 1998.
    CIG states that the purpose of this compliance filing is to conform 
CIG's tariff to requirements of Order No. 587-G that interstate 
pipelines transporting pursuant to Section 284.223 of the commissions 
regulations conform their tariffs to include Version 1.2 of the GISB 
standards and to make minor housekeeping changes by capitalizing defend 
terms.
    CIG further states that copies of this filing have been served on 
CIG's jurisdictional customers and public bodies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-17038 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Filed 9/15/16 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2016 ND 179

In the Matter of Sandy Lee Mangelsen 

Haley L. Wamstad, Grand Forks County

Assistant State’s Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

Sandy Lee Mangelsen, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20160052

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Jon J. Jensen, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Meredith H. Larson, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks County State’s Attorney, 124 South Fourth Street, P.O. Box 5607, Grand Forks, N.D. 58206-5607, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

Tyler J. Morrow, 424 Demers Avenue, Grand Forks, N.D. 58201, for respondent and appellant.

Matter of Mangelsen

No. 20160052

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Sandy Lee Mangelsen appeals from a district court order denying his petition for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual.  Mangelsen argues the district court’s order was not supported by clear and convincing evidence.  Because the findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Lisa Fair McEvers

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
Exhibit
3   ARTICLES
OF AMENDMENT
 OF
 ALLETE,
INC.
  
 Amending
paragraph 1, Article III and Deleting Article V
 of
ALLETE, Inc.’s Articles of Incorporation
 as
Amended and Restated as of May 8, 2001
 and as
previously amended as of September 20, 2004
 
 
 
 ARTICLE
III
 
 1.           The
total authorized number of shares of capital stock of this Corporation shall be
83,616,000 of which 116,000 shares of the par value of $100 each shall be 5%
Preferred Stock, 1,000,000 shares without par value shall be Serial Preferred
Stock, 2,500,000 shares without par value shall be Serial Preferred Stock A and
80,000,000 shares without par value shall be Common Stock. Any of the aforesaid
shares may be issued and disposed of by the Board of Directors at any time and
from time to time, to such persons, firms, corporations, or associations, upon
such terms and for such consideration as the Board of Directors may, in its
discretion, determine, except as may be limited by law or by these Articles of
Incorporation.
 
 
 ARTICLE
V
 
 [Deleted
and intentionally reserved.]
No. 10-457.

#### Kevin G. Chesney, et ux., Petitioners v. Valley Stream Union Free School District No. 24, et al.

562 U.S. 1136, 131 S. Ct. 908,

178 L. Ed. 2d 749,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 187.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
April 1, 2010 

Letter to the Docket 

Docket FAA-2009-1174 

Submitted Electronically 

Document Management System : 

www.regulations.gov 

Subject: P&W Petition for Exemption 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

This letter is in response to a request for clarification received from FAA Aircraft 

Certification Service, Production Certification Branch, AIR-220, J. Linsenmeyer in an 

email dated February 26, 2010. In that email, AIR-220 wrote: 

We are reviewing your petition for exemption, and we need some 

clarification about the scope of the relief you seek. Please confirm, 

under whose production approval will the EBU hardware cited in your 

petition be manufactured? 

If possible, please transmit your feedback to us via the federal docket 

under your exemption's assigned docket number, No. FAA-2009-1174. 

Pratt & Whitney intends to procure parts or kits from Part 23, 25, 27 or 29 certified 

Production Approval Holders, rather than manufacturing the Part 23, 25, 27 or 29 parts or 

kits itself. Installation of the Part 23, 25, 27 or 29 parts or kits would occur under Pratt & 

Whitney’s Production Certificate. 

If you need any additional information, please feel free to contact me. 

Sincerely, 

Cathryn Cope 

Manager – Regulatory Compliance 

Pratt & Whitney - Group Quality 

Pratt & Whitney 

400 Main Street M/S 102-35 

East Hartford, CT 06108 

(860) 557-1157 / Fax: (860) 557-7721 

Cathryn Cope 

Manager - Regulatory Compliance 

Group Quality Assurance 
cc: Via Email 

FAA - AIR-200 

FAA - MIDO-41
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                      Exhibit 21

                         EDO CORPORATION'S SUBSIDIARIES
                               ACTIVE SUBSIDARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      NAMES UNDER WHICH
       SUBSIDIARY                      STATE OF INCORPORATION       SUBSIDIARY DOES BUSINESS
<S>                                    <C>                       <C>
AIL Technologies Inc.                  Delaware

AIL Systems Inc. (owned by AIL         Delaware                  EDO Technical Services Operations
Technologies Inc.)                                               EDO Electronic Systems Group

Darlington Inc.                        Delaware                  Darlington of Virginia, Inc.

EDO Artisan Inc.                       New Jersey

EDO Communications and                 California
Countermeasures Systems Inc.

EDO MTech Inc.                         Pennsylvania              EDO M. Tech

EDO Professional Services Inc.         Virginia                  Advanced Engineering & Research
                                                                 Associates Which Will
                                                                 Do Business In California As
                                                                 Virginia AERA, Inc
                                                                 AERA Incorporated
                                                                 AERA, Inc.

EDO Reconnaissance and                 Delaware                  EDO Communications and
Surveillance Systems, Inc.                                       Countermeasures Systems

EDO Western Corporation                Utah                      EDO Electro-Ceramic Products

Specialty Plastics, Inc.               Louisiana                 EDO Specialty Plastics
</TABLE>
No. 09-11321.

#### In re Allah, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 1055, 131 S. Ct. 627,

178 L. Ed. 2d 456,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9018.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 825, 131 S. Ct. 178, 178 L. Ed. 2d 255, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7755.
No. 10-6272.

#### Theodore Tinsley, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1141, 131 S. Ct. 903,

178 L. Ed. 2d 760,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 280.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
No. 10-619.

#### Ronald B. Talmage, et ux., Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

562 U.S. 1139, 131 S. Ct. 941,

178 L. Ed. 2d 755,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 508.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 391 Fed. Appx. 660.
EXHIBIT 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Kenneth A. Paladino and Marvin
D. Genzer, and each of them, with full power of substitution, the undersigned's
true and lawful attorneys and agents to execute in his name and on his behalf,
in any and all capabilities, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of EDO Corporation
(the "Company"), a New York corporation, for the fiscal year ended December 31,
1998, and any and all other instruments which such attorneys and agents, or
either of them, deem necessary or advisable to enable the Company to comply
with the annual reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and the rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and
Exchange Commission; and the undersigned hereby ratifies and confirms as his
own act and deed all that such attorneys and agents, and each of them, shall do
or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Either of such attorneys and agents shall
have, and may exercise, all of the powers hereby conferred.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have subscribed their signatures this 17th
day of March, 1999.

     Robert E. Allen
     Robert Alvine
     Mellon C. Baird
     George M. Ball
     Joseph F. Engelberger
     Frank A. Fariello
     William J. Frost
     Marvin D. Genzer
     Robert M. Hanisee
     Michael J. Hegarty
     Ira Kaplan
     James M. Smith
     George A. Strutz, Jr.